In My Right Mind

"We all do no end of feeling, and we mistake it for thinking." - Mark Twain

My Photo
Location: Universal City, Texas, United States

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take away everything you have." - Thomas Jefferson

Saturday, February 11, 2006

Pathetic Liberal Tactics When You Dare To Challenge Their Viewpoint

In my short time in the blogosphere, I have experienced discourse with several liberal bloggers. Below is an enumeration of some of what I have learned from my discussions with them thus far. This list is not all inclusive, as I'm sure that I have just begun to crack the surface when it comes to the shenanigans of liberal bloggers. I will update this list as I go along.

First let me say, that it is quite possible that there are liberal bloggers out there who are capable of well reasoned, civilized dialogue even though, I haven't found too many yet. That being said, you can pretty much count on about 99.0 % of the liberal blogosphere being comprised of moonbats that have a fan following of mal-adjusted individuals (everything from persons struggling with depression and bipolar psychological maladies to "metaphysical ministers" in search of the "god in everyone"). It's sad actually.

All of this being said, let's go beyond the preamble and proceed to the list:

1. Spin. They will try to change the subject – do anything other than answer your question. After all, to answer the questions your counter-argument poses would expose the absurdity of their argument

2. Lie. Some liberals seem to have no scruples when it comes to telling outright lies. In fact, most liberal slander directed against President Bush, turns out to be carefully constructed lies that don't tell the whole truth, just the spin that they want to make on any given issue. This has a two fold purpose. First, it is used to cover up an exposed hole in the logic of their own argument, and secondly, they will brazenly tell a lie hoping that gullible people who don’t possess the skill of critical thinking, (i.e. those who will stop and examine the veracity of their claim), will just accept it as truth, based solely on its emotional appeal.

3. Arrogantly insinuate that you haven’t done enough research to come to the correct conclusion. [Note: While thorough research into a matter is always a good thing, it should be pointed out that until your research results in you abandoning your point of view and taking up the liberal view point, you haven’t researched the topic enough. This is pure arrogance on their part and should in most cases be ignored.]

4. Another arrogant tactic of the “tolerant” left is to point out that you need to consult a dictionary to ensure that you understand the meaning of whatever word that you have used that threatens to expose the hollowness of their argument. You might also encounter criticisms of any misspelled words, or grammatically incomplete or incorrect sentences. Although, the average person would understand that one can make mistakes when they are putting down their response, the particularly whiny type of liberal will home in on these mistakes in hopes that it provides a distraction which will stall the examination of the obvious lies and absurdity of their liberal view point.

5. Name Calling. This is perhaps the most common tactic that you will encounter. Once they know they can’t really defend their flimsy viewpoint they will, like spoiled children, resort to name calling. Don’t let it get you down. It’s actually amusing, and the more they do this the more they destroy their own reputation and the impression that they actually have anything of value to say. [One liberal blogger, started off the comments section to one of his posts with the statement that all opinions were always welcome in his blog, but then later resorted to name calling when I offered an opinion different to his. I believe I was called a “sap”, and then later in another comment from him a “sad sap”. So, all opinons are not necessarily welcome in the environment of the "tolerant" left].

6. Censorship (aka “moderation of comments” allowed on their site). A particular liberal blogger I have engaged with likes to use the “delete the opponents comments so that you can have the last word" technique so that he can convince himself, and his gullible fans, that he has won the argument. This liberal went so far as to delete all of my comments that presented counter arguments to his position, then add his own last comment where he lied, claiming he deleted my comments due to foul language, which he uses frequently on his blog. In other words the hypocrite exposed himself as... well... a hypocrite. Silly liberal! He now only allows comments to post after he has approved of them. Of course he claims that even though he is trying to avoid spam, and “right wing nuts” (i.e. anyone who disagrees with his point of view) that he is in no way intending censorship. [To use a liberal tactic against a liberal I wonder if pointing out point 4 above would be useful?]

This is what I have encountered so far. I can't wait to see what other lame tactics the left has left to expose. It will no doubt be entertaining. I'll do my best to keep anyone who visits my blog informed.

Until then, I'll do my part in perserving the Constitution by squashing anti-American, communist/socialist liberal arguments one at at time.


Blogger James said...

That's a pretty comprehensive list, although I'm sure as time goes on we'll discover more tactics & "winning" strategies.

Another one that I've noticed is pretending that there is some virtue in reaching a mystical "middle ground" or "agreeing to disagree." This usually amounts to them expecting you to admit that their opinion is the right one or that it's possible both your views have equal weight and validity. Again, when I pointed this out to one blogger, my comment mysteriously got "deleted by blogspot" and she lost the e-mail as well.

8:08 PM  
Blogger Clay said...

Yeah, that should be added to the list. After just checking back in at Rich's web site (the liberal that isn't anything like Mark or Jay), I have unfortunately discovered yet another tactic:

If you stand firm in your opinion, then you are simply, in the words of Rich, (who I at first thought was a more rational
liberal), "unfocused derision".


That pretty much trumps all of my enumerated liberal tactics as being the most ridiculous.

Is this how a liberal admits defeat?


10:12 PM  
Blogger Jay said...

Intereting fantasy you have here. Pity I've never called you a name nor censored nor edited any comment you've ever made on my blog...otherwise, you would have a pretty good fairy tale going on here.

Want to argue political philosophy with me? Bring it on. I love spanking chickenhawks on my blog. Good for traffic and my readers enjoy the laughs.

4:23 AM  
Blogger Rich | Championable said...

One of the great "metaphysical ministers" who you are deriding is the man I consider the Son of God, Jesus Christ:

As a Catholic, I have to say I find you derision of the "God within you" concept a bit offensive. Of course, as an American, I believe you have the right to say whatever you want.

Jesus Christ repeatedly used the idea of the light within, in all four of the Canonical Gospels. Some of the non-Canonical works, such as the Gospel of Thomas, further expand the concept.

I realize that your derision of the concept may, indeed have been "unfocused," and not specifically attacking Jesus Christ, but you should know that it's a basic tenet of Canonical Christianity.

Take care.

6:35 AM  
Blogger Clay said...


Nice try. It would be cogent if it wasn't an outright lie. You have deleted my comments before and you did post your "last word" comment accusing me of, let's see how did you put it? Oh yeah, "does your mother kiss you with that mouth of yours?" In fact I posted on your shenanigans at the time:

A friend of mine, James, has experienced the same treatment by you repetitively, yet I have never deleted any of your comments you post to my blog. And I won't unless they contain excessive profanity.

You have now apparently gone a step further on your blog than just deleting comments that you don't like, now you are employing "moderation" where you read each comment and then decide whether or not it get's posted.

You try to lamely claim that this is not censorship on your part, but only a fool would believe that deciding what you allow on your blog is anything but censorship.

You never called me any names? Well let's see in the post that I attempted to comment to on your site you called me: a punk, a stalker, a nut, more like a cockroach than a fan, a freaking psychopath, a crazy asswipe, and oh yeah, the ever popular: a loser.

As for never deleting any of my comments, let's let your words just speak for themselves shall we:

"...I'm getting a bit tired of having you fill your worthless days by posting your childish drivel on my blog. I let you have a soapbox to rant about your loony shit, but I'm deleting it ALL. Every damn thing you have ever posted is now gone. Anything you might post in the future will be deleted immediately without reading and without comment. You are not welcome here any longer you crazy asswipe.Get-a-life loser. jeeze"

Pretty pathetic. So come back when you have an actual point to make. Ciao


I too believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and I wasn't deriding either him in any way. But Jesus wasn't a pagan, nor did he espouse the philosophy of Spinoza and monism.

While I am conservative in politics, I am not a fundamentalist nor conservative in my theology. However, I don't let writing outside the canon of the Church influence my Christian beliefs.

I am familiar with the theological works of Marcus Borg and Jon Dominic Crosan and The Jesus Seminar", I have read their stuff, and I am familiar with the Gospel of Thomas. It makes for interesting reading but it does not represent orthodox Christianity. I may not be a fundamentalist, nor a conservative theologically speaking but I do stay within the bounds of orthodoxy.

I am an Episcopalian, since we are identifying denominational affiliation, and I have a Bachelor's Degree in Christianity, so I hardly need to be lectured on
canonical Christianity.

I didn't realize your characterization of my blog as "unfocused derision" refered specifically to my mentioning a "metaphysical minister" in one of my posts. I wish you had made that distinction.

You made it sound like the post on my blog that your read was unfocused derision. Which is an interesting tactic when you don't want to actually debate with someone with a different point. You just label the opponent's viewpoint as unfocused derision and then pretend you win the argument by default. I hope that is not what you were doing.

As for the metaphysical minister I was refering to, I doubt that her paganism and belief that her parents are now on different planes intersects anywhere with Christianity so I honestly don't know how you managed to drag Jesus Christ into it and accuse me of attacking Him in any way.

Take care

8:14 AM  
Blogger Rich | Championable said...

Honestly, I was referring to your sweeping categorizations of folks with different opinions as "unfocused derision." And I'm stickin' to it. Normally, this would be the point where one would pull various examples from your posts here and on other blogs, and use them to repeat my core argument, then you would refute, then me, then you, etc., etc.

At its core, though, I define "standing up for your principles" in a fundamentally different way than you do. I don't think that's what you do at all.

Anyway: stick a fork in me, baby. I'm done.

Apologies that I misunderstood your point about religion, tho'.

9:55 AM  
Blogger Jay said... I and der fearless monkey has said...bring it on. I don't delete unless you cowardly attack another reader since I'm not interested in trolls starting flame wars on my blog. I don't edit out comments from folks like you and fellow rightwingnuts since the best way to prove an idiot is to let them speak.

My theory is that you don't like being made a fool of in front of intelligent people....prefering to remain here on your own turf where you can convince yourself that anything you say is relevant.

Can't say I blame you. Ta-ta

9:58 AM  
Blogger Clay said...


I agree with you that we have different viewpoints on how we defend our positions. I think it's fair enough to leave it at that. Like you, I fail to see the point in engaing in a you said, so what game back and forth.

I wish you the best and I am bookmarking your blog because I like reading all of your comments. You've got a really good writing style.


If I were afraid of being made a fool of in front of "intelligent people" as you so arrogantly put it, then I would be perfectly safe hanging out at your site.

As for me staying on my own turf to convince myself that what I have to say is relevant, two things:

First, I can't possibly go to yours and comment, since you censor yours. There's no point in wasting my time composing a comment that you are just going to delete and not allow on your site in the first place.

Second, I post on other sites and you know it. Take your buddy Mark's site for instance. Why must you be so disengenous. Is it that you have told so many lies so frequently that you can't tell the difference between a lie and the truth? Or better yet, perhaps you think that making snarky, arrogant comments laced with untruths somehow shows you to be intellectually superior.

Get a life Jay.

10:54 AM  
Blogger Rich | Championable said...

My email address is

What's up?

11:18 AM  
Blogger James said...

Jay, As I've said, the truth is not in you. You habitually censor comments to your blog. For example, the one proving that Southern Democrats (who remaned Dems, not those who became Republicans) opposed desegregation and civil rights.

You can't argue political philosophy if you don't allow argument. Since you've enabled comment moderation not one comment I've made has been posted to your blog. You are a liar and a coward. I think it stems from your poor self-image.

8:01 PM  
Blogger Jay said...

Really guys....I enabled full access on my comments again. I've always let you have your say. I've never deleted unless you cowardly attacked some other reader or just babbled on about something incomprehensable for post after endless multi-hundred word post. I do tend bite and have little sympathy for cowards and fakes.

Comment on my blog if you dare.

Or stay and cry on each other's shoulders about mean liberals. You'll be safe here.

7:21 AM  
Blogger Clay said...


So, you say:

"I've never deleted unless you cowardly attacked some other reader or just babbled on about something incomprehensable for post after endless multi-hundred word post. I do tend bite and have little sympathy for cowards and fakes."

Oh, so now you're admiting that you do in fact delete comments. What a change of tune! Of course, then you lamely try to defend taking the cowards way out by claiming we were attacking some other reader.

That's understandable. You adore your fans. In fact you called me one time...what was it? Oh yeah, "more like a cockroach than a fan".

So, it is clear that those who don't kiss your ass or are your fans, or have any opinions that oppose you or fans lame positon will have their comments deleted.

But, perhaps it is your second lame justification for intellectual cowardness that is the most amusing: the old, "I don't like the fact that you aren't singing my tune, so I'll call your counter arguments babbling 'on about something incomprehensable for post after endless multi-hundred word post'."

I'm not sure if you classify counter arguments as such because they are so far over your head that you don't understand them, or if it's just that only comments that echo your own viewpoints, (do you actually have one beyond just making arrogant snarky comments that usually have little to do with the argument topic at hand?)
are allowed on your blog.

Apparently, anything that doesn't support your Bush is "der monkey", Hitler and whatever other childish name you can come up with, must be deleted since, beyond name calling you just can't offer any counter arguments against them, much less support your position beyond name-calling derisions against our President.

You say,

"I do tend [to] bite and have little sympathy for cowards and fakes."

So, you actually think that you can bite? I hate to burst your bubble Jay, but no, you don't have any bite, just bark. You are, however, really good at making an ass out of yourself.

You say:

"Comment on my blog if you dare.

Or stay and cry on each other's shoulders about mean liberals. You'll be safe here. "

Considering the fact that you have a penchant for deleting comments and then "having the last comment", (usally claiming some lie about what you deleted which is not available to verify by any readers), it's not a question of commenting on your pathetic blog if I dare, but rather why? Why waste my time?

Don't worry, neither James nor I stay on our own blogs to feel safe
(As evidenced by the fact that we have commented on your blog a lot, as well as one of your fans, Mark)
and laughing at, not "mean liberals" as you so pathetically take a last dying stab at being relevant, but rather the absurdity and hypocrisy of liberals.

Nice try Jay.

Don't worry though. I will comment on your hate Bush crusade of a blog from time to time, to a) check on your integrity and confidence in your ability to actually defend your position rather than win arguments in your mind by controlling the conversation, and b) rattle your chain.

You are predictable and it can be a cheap form of entertainment, although I must admit manipulating leftists' sheep like you is probably not the moral thing to do.
Especially since I have to agree with James, you obviously suffer from a poor self-image.

7:47 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home